The volume focuses on the ways that Persian speakers (who in the book are mostly Sufis) expressed themselves between the eleventh and the fourteenth centuries. The genres were many, ranging from the sophisticated poetry of masters such as ^cAṭṭār and Rūmī to the more prosaic and transparent works of authors like ^cAzīz Nasafī and those who recorded the utterances and sermons of their masters. The relationship between the multivalence of the Persian language and the growth in the popularity of the Sufis is written between the lines of many of the chapters of this engaging volume. To express this in the words of the editors, the book explores the “cross fertilization between medieval Persian literature and the Islamic mode of piety known as Sufism” (p. 2). The volume is edited by scholars of international repute in Persian literature and Sufism, and so they have been able to draw on the expertise of respected academics.

However, the first essay of the First Part that looks at the Qur^ͻān, by Travis Zadeh, titled “Developments in Early Exegesis,” is a disappointment. Given the clearly stated aim of the book in the introduction, it is noticeable that Travis’s chapter mentions neither Sufism nor mysticism nor any such movement. His chapter is interesting as a study of Qur^ͻānic exegesis in Persian, but it is misplaced in this volume. Fortunately, the Sufi content of Maybodi’s Twelfth-century Qur^ͻānic Commentary, the subject of the second chapter by Annabel Keeler, demonstrates his skill in the Persian language in composing poetic prose in his Kashf al-Asrār. She also excavates his sources, revealing his debt to many Sufi thinkers, before providing examples of how specific Qur^ͻānic verses were given Sufi, interiorized meanings.

The second part of the book, called Major Prose Genres, commences with a chapter by Jawid Mojaddedi on “Sufi Manuals/Questions and Answers.” Mojaddedi’s principle claim is that the manuals written in the tenth-thirteenth centuries in the vernacular, rather than the scholastic Arabic, tended to address controversies for the benefit of the Persian practitioner or the ordinary people. Interesting as Mojaddedi’s chapter is, one wonders why he did not include the Persian language manual-like works of ^cAyn al-Quḍāt or the thirteenth-century Sufis affiliated in one form or another with the Kobrawi order. Of course parameters need to be drawn, and the chapter could quite easily have become a monograph. Mojaddedi concludes his survey by examining fifteenth- and sixteenth-century works that were influenced by Ibn ^cArabī. He also considers more recent publications that include discussions on topics related to Sufism, such as the “ancient Persian tradition” of chivalry. He concludes that “Persian Sufi manuals and question/answer works have contributed to the distinctive character of Sufism in the Persianate world” (p. 112), which contrasts with the theoretical Arabic scholastic manuals.

The fourth chapter is by Devin DeWeese, who writes on “Sufi Hagiographies in Persian.” This is an exceedingly useful, if descriptive, account. Deweese reminds us that such works exist in Persian in Indonesia, China, Siberia, the Volga, and the Balkans. The “soft power” of Persia and the Sufis was indeed extensive. In conclusion, DeWeese rightly rejects the “older dismissals of hagiographies by positivist historians,” as such works inform us of the politics, economics, and social conditions of the times, in addition to issues of theology and religion. This chapter is one of the highlights of the volume.

Chapter five is by Amina M. Steinfels, who writes on “Malfuzāt and Other Compilations of Sufi and Oral Teachings.” Steinfels focuses predominantly on the Indian tradition, for the “wide popularity of these texts led to their development into a genuine genre” (p. 149). It was their “spiritual teaching” and “autobiographical material” that accounted for the lasting appeal of this genre.

Part Three consists of just chapters six and seven. It might have been better to rethink the whole structure of the “landscapes” and devote more attention to other sections, such as genre. Nevertheless, the contributions are authored by the “big-hitters.” Carl Ernst has already written a monograph on Ruzbehān Baqlī, so this contribution is merely a taster. Ahmet T. Karakustafa has offered a chapter on the sharī^ca, according to ^cAzīz Nasafī. The article is pleasant enough, but Nasafī is hardly a profound or innovative figure within Sufism. However, there can be no doubt about his popularity given the prevalence of manuscripts that contain his works.

Part Four investigates “Sufi Poets/Poet Sufis,” and it includes three chapters. The first, by Cyrus Ali Zargar, called “The Cruelty of the Way and the Afflictions of dīn,” investigates how ^cAṭṭār (d.c. 1220) married the difficulties of observing the sharī^ca or dīn with the afflictions experienced by the Sufi on the path. Much has been written on ^cAṭṭār and Sufi suffering, but Zargar’s chapter offers a very neat summary of the topic. One of the features of this chapter is the inclusion of copious translations of ^cAṭṭār’s poetry to illustrate a point. Zargar concludes that “the transcendent [is found] in the quotidian; the seemingly impossible in the ritually practical; and that which baffles (by undoing the distinctions between God and human) in the straightforward observance of dīn” (p. 241). After arduously observing the rituals of religion and suffering and losing the self on the path, the Sufi has come full circle, but s/he enjoys the Presence of the divine.

If there is a jewel in this collection, it is chapter nine by Matthew Thomas Miller, whose work is on the poet ^cErāqī. Miller demonstrates how ^cErāqī’s Lama^cāt combined the mystical-philosophical worldview of Ibn ^cArabī with the Persian love prose style of Aḥmad Ghazālī. He also considers his poetic ghazals – the transgressive, love, and qalandarī varieties – and concludes that while it may be an exaggeration to call him the “ocean of the Persians,” it is true that his influence can still be felt in the modern period, to the extent that his poetic style was imitated by the great Pakistani thinker, Muḥammad Iqbāl.

The book is concluded by Fatemeh Keshavarz, who writes on “Rumi: The Poetic Art of Speaking with the Divine.” Keshavarz seeks to identify how Rumi “turned his poetic art into a conduit for connection with the Divine” (p. 288), and she utilizes both the Mathnawī and the Dīvān-i Kabīr in her analysis. This is an innovative but successful endeavor, for the former is usually considered a didactic text as opposed to the lyrics in the flights of ecstatic intimacy contained in the latter.

While there are many positive elements in Mystical Landscapes in Medieval Persian Literature, there are some issues that caused this reviewer a degree of surprise. First, as already mentioned, it is peculiar that a volume about mystical landscapes in Persian literature does not consider Sufism or mysticism in the opening chapter. Second, I am unsure whether the two chapters of Part Three would be considered “key” in the literature of Medieval Persian. It is to be wondered why key figures such as Sa^cdī or Ḥāfeẓ are not discussed. Despite these reservations, the volume is highly engaging and should be recommended reading on any undergraduate reading list for a course on Sufism.